Torsten Curdt wrote:
On 21.01.2008, at 10:08, Tom Schindl wrote:
Hi Torsten,
I understand this but we are seeing many J2EE-Servers adopting OSGi
and many applications
(I admit most of them in Eclipse-world) also. It seems strange to me
in those envs to use this "artificial"
package to overcome jar-hell (which is the only reason for the
java5-package right?) they are not having
because of OSGi.
Hm.... not sure why its such a big deal to have e.g. o.a.commons.lang2
or similar. If you use an IDE that manages imports you will barely
notice anyway.
personally I've always wondered why having a version attached to the
namespace hasn't taken off more to deal with api breaking releases. if
we had org.antlr1 org.antlr2 org.antlr3 life would be much easier. Sure
you wouldn't get auto drop in jar and release, but I'm guessing tooling
could make up for that in those cases.
While it's great that OSGi adoption is getting better I still don't
believe it's something Commons should rely on. At least that's my
opinion.
cheers
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
